21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study
The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison,...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of surgical research 2020-02, Vol.246, p.427-434 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 434 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 427 |
container_title | The Journal of surgical research |
container_volume | 246 |
creator | Wang, Jian Yao, Fei Yao, Ju Xu, Lei Qian, Jun-Ling Shan, Li-Mei |
description | The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis.
From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months.
There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups.
The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2313355583</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022480419306559</els_id><sourcerecordid>2313355583</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLLDEQhYMoOj5-gJtLlnfTYyrp9ENXw-ALFAUVlyGTVHMzdE-Pqe6B-fdGRu9SKCiKOufA-Rg7BzEFAcXFcrokmkoB9VSkkbDHJiBqnVVFqfbZRAgps7wS-RE7JlqKdNelOmRHCoq61qqcsHcJGd9gpJG41FnX8XmIbmxt5C-DXbfpw5s-8jnGTXC25bOVpaHvegp0yWf8OfZrXFEYttmjHdw_9Mk3-u0pO2hsS3j2vU_Y28316_wue3i6vZ_PHjKntBqyOq-9q5wCVJWXTmjAPPUBdI0uG19AUdS2qPJGeg-ltrYAWeWwcNYuINe5OmF_d7nr2H-MSIPpAjlsW7vCfiQjFSilta5UksJO6mJPFLEx6xg6G7cGhPniaZYm8TRfPI1IIyF5_nzHj4sO_X_HD8AkuNoJMJXcBIyGXMCVQx8iusH4PvwS_wneI4Si</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2313355583</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Wang, Jian ; Yao, Fei ; Yao, Ju ; Xu, Lei ; Qian, Jun-Ling ; Shan, Li-Mei</creator><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jian ; Yao, Fei ; Yao, Ju ; Xu, Lei ; Qian, Jun-Ling ; Shan, Li-Mei</creatorcontrib><description>The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis.
From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months.
There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups.
The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-4804</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8673</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31699537</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects ; Anastomosis-related complications ; Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology ; Anastomotic Leak - etiology ; Cervical anastomosis ; Circular stapler ; Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology ; Constriction, Pathologic - etiology ; Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery ; Esophagectomy - adverse effects ; Esophagectomy - instrumentation ; Esophagectomy - methods ; Esophagostomy - adverse effects ; Esophagostomy - instrumentation ; Esophagostomy - methods ; Female ; Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology ; Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology ; Gastrostomy - adverse effects ; Gastrostomy - instrumentation ; Gastrostomy - methods ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Operative Time ; Propensity Score ; Retrospective Studies ; Surgical Staplers - adverse effects ; Surgical Stapling - adverse effects ; Surgical Stapling - instrumentation ; Surgical Stapling - methods ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>The Journal of surgical research, 2020-02, Vol.246, p.427-434</ispartof><rights>2019 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9416-3617 ; 0000-0002-5338-6395</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31699537$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Fei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Ju</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Lei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qian, Jun-Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shan, Li-Mei</creatorcontrib><title>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</title><title>The Journal of surgical research</title><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><description>The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis.
From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months.
There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups.
The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects</subject><subject>Anastomosis-related complications</subject><subject>Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology</subject><subject>Anastomotic Leak - etiology</subject><subject>Cervical anastomosis</subject><subject>Circular stapler</subject><subject>Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology</subject><subject>Constriction, Pathologic - etiology</subject><subject>Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Esophagectomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Esophagectomy - instrumentation</subject><subject>Esophagectomy - methods</subject><subject>Esophagostomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Esophagostomy - instrumentation</subject><subject>Esophagostomy - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology</subject><subject>Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology</subject><subject>Gastrostomy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Gastrostomy - instrumentation</subject><subject>Gastrostomy - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Propensity Score</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Surgical Staplers - adverse effects</subject><subject>Surgical Stapling - adverse effects</subject><subject>Surgical Stapling - instrumentation</subject><subject>Surgical Stapling - methods</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0022-4804</issn><issn>1095-8673</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLLDEQhYMoOj5-gJtLlnfTYyrp9ENXw-ALFAUVlyGTVHMzdE-Pqe6B-fdGRu9SKCiKOufA-Rg7BzEFAcXFcrokmkoB9VSkkbDHJiBqnVVFqfbZRAgps7wS-RE7JlqKdNelOmRHCoq61qqcsHcJGd9gpJG41FnX8XmIbmxt5C-DXbfpw5s-8jnGTXC25bOVpaHvegp0yWf8OfZrXFEYttmjHdw_9Mk3-u0pO2hsS3j2vU_Y28316_wue3i6vZ_PHjKntBqyOq-9q5wCVJWXTmjAPPUBdI0uG19AUdS2qPJGeg-ltrYAWeWwcNYuINe5OmF_d7nr2H-MSIPpAjlsW7vCfiQjFSilta5UksJO6mJPFLEx6xg6G7cGhPniaZYm8TRfPI1IIyF5_nzHj4sO_X_HD8AkuNoJMJXcBIyGXMCVQx8iusH4PvwS_wneI4Si</recordid><startdate>202002</startdate><enddate>202002</enddate><creator>Wang, Jian</creator><creator>Yao, Fei</creator><creator>Yao, Ju</creator><creator>Xu, Lei</creator><creator>Qian, Jun-Ling</creator><creator>Shan, Li-Mei</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9416-3617</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5338-6395</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202002</creationdate><title>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</title><author>Wang, Jian ; Yao, Fei ; Yao, Ju ; Xu, Lei ; Qian, Jun-Ling ; Shan, Li-Mei</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-949dc8c31e38d2c051e42011ecf57fd61669a684f2dd175aa612841bcaab14543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects</topic><topic>Anastomosis-related complications</topic><topic>Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology</topic><topic>Anastomotic Leak - etiology</topic><topic>Cervical anastomosis</topic><topic>Circular stapler</topic><topic>Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology</topic><topic>Constriction, Pathologic - etiology</topic><topic>Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Esophagectomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Esophagectomy - instrumentation</topic><topic>Esophagectomy - methods</topic><topic>Esophagostomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Esophagostomy - instrumentation</topic><topic>Esophagostomy - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology</topic><topic>Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology</topic><topic>Gastrostomy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Gastrostomy - instrumentation</topic><topic>Gastrostomy - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Propensity Score</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Surgical Staplers - adverse effects</topic><topic>Surgical Stapling - adverse effects</topic><topic>Surgical Stapling - instrumentation</topic><topic>Surgical Stapling - methods</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Fei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yao, Ju</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Lei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Qian, Jun-Ling</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shan, Li-Mei</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wang, Jian</au><au>Yao, Fei</au><au>Yao, Ju</au><au>Xu, Lei</au><au>Qian, Jun-Ling</au><au>Shan, Li-Mei</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><date>2020-02</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>246</volume><spage>427</spage><epage>434</epage><pages>427-434</pages><issn>0022-4804</issn><eissn>1095-8673</eissn><abstract>The use of a small circular stapler (CS) has been reported to increase the incidence of benign anastomotic stricture of the intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy, but no study has evaluated the effects of the CS size on cervical esophagogastrostomy. Based on a propensity-matched comparison, the present study was designed to determine whether the perioperative outcomes differ between 21- and 25-mm CSs after minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis.
From January 2015 to December 2017, 162 patients who received CS cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified from our surgical database. A propensity-matched analysis was used to compare the outcomes between the 21- and 25-mm CS groups. Endpoints included anastomotic leak, dysphagia, reflux, stricture, and other major postoperative outcomes within 6 postoperative months.
There were 69 and 93 patients in the 21- and 25-mm CS groups, respectively. Propensity matching produced 57 patients in each group. The two groups were not remarkably different in benign anastomotic stricture rate (P = 0.528). All strictures were resolved by balloon dilatation. The 25-mm CS group had a significantly longer operative time in cervical anastomosis than the 21-mm group (P = 0.005). No statistically significant differences in anastomotic leak rates, dysphagia scores, reflux scores, or other postoperative complications were noted between the two groups.
The use of a 21-mm CS in minimally invasive esophagectomy with cervical esophagogastric anastomosis did not result in greater anastomotic stricture as compared with a 25-mm CS. The 21-mm CS was associated with a significantly shorter operative time.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>31699537</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9416-3617</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5338-6395</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-4804 |
ispartof | The Journal of surgical research, 2020-02, Vol.246, p.427-434 |
issn | 0022-4804 1095-8673 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2313355583 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Aged Anastomosis, Surgical - adverse effects Anastomosis-related complications Anastomotic Leak - epidemiology Anastomotic Leak - etiology Cervical anastomosis Circular stapler Constriction, Pathologic - epidemiology Constriction, Pathologic - etiology Esophageal Neoplasms - surgery Esophagectomy - adverse effects Esophagectomy - instrumentation Esophagectomy - methods Esophagostomy - adverse effects Esophagostomy - instrumentation Esophagostomy - methods Female Gastroesophageal Reflux - epidemiology Gastroesophageal Reflux - etiology Gastrostomy - adverse effects Gastrostomy - instrumentation Gastrostomy - methods Humans Male Middle Aged Operative Time Propensity Score Retrospective Studies Surgical Staplers - adverse effects Surgical Stapling - adverse effects Surgical Stapling - instrumentation Surgical Stapling - methods Time Factors Treatment Outcome |
title | 21- versus 25-mm Circular Staplers for Cervical Anastomosis: A Propensity-Matched Study |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-03T22%3A30%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=21-%20versus%2025-mm%20Circular%20Staplers%20for%20Cervical%20Anastomosis:%20A%20Propensity-Matched%20Study&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20surgical%20research&rft.au=Wang,%20Jian&rft.date=2020-02&rft.volume=246&rft.spage=427&rft.epage=434&rft.pages=427-434&rft.issn=0022-4804&rft.eissn=1095-8673&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jss.2019.09.021&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2313355583%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2313355583&rft_id=info:pmid/31699537&rft_els_id=S0022480419306559&rfr_iscdi=true |